HC Relief to MBBS Aspirant Who Wrongly Chose BDS Course During Counselling
Madurai: The Madras High Court recently granted relief to a student, who mistakenly chose the BDS course despite being allotted the MBBS course in the first round of counselling.
Disagreeing with the State's highly technical contention to give capital punishment to the student for a genuine mistake, the HC Division Bench of Justice R Subramaniam and Justice Sunder Mohan upheld the Single-bench order granting relief to the concerned student.
"We do not think we can interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. All that has been done is to condone the mistake committed by a very bright student, who has obtained State first in ICSE Board of Studies in 12th Standard. The student conceded that he had committed a mistake in choosing BDS course despite having allotted a MBBS seat in the first round of counselling. This mistake has been condoned by the learned Single Judge and a direction has been issued to offer the seat that was allotted to the student in the first round," observed the Division Bench.
The Division bench of the High Court was hearing a plea filed by the Directorate of Medical Education challenging the single-judge order. It was contended by the Directorate that once the candidate opted for the BDS seat, he had to relinquish the MBBS seat, granted to him in the first and second round of counselling.
On the other hand, the student submitted that he had made a genuine and inadvertent mistake while selecting the colleges in the third round of counselling. As per the latest media report by Live Law, the petitioner student submitted that while he had correctly opted for the Government Medical College in the first two rounds of allotment, he erroneously chose the Government Dental College in the third round.
He also submitted that after realizing his mistake, he immediately emailed the Selection Committee and the Directorate of Medical Education, informed them about it, and requested them to re-fix his allotment based on the correct choices.
The petitioner, who is a very bright student and obtained State first in ICSE Board of Studies in 12th Standard, further submitted before the HC bench that he had requested the authorities to at least allow him retain the already allotted MBBS seats. However, the authorities rejected his grievance. Arguing such action on the part of the authorities to be arbitrary, unreasonable, unjust, and illegal, the petitioner approached the Single Judge bench, which granted him relief.
When the authorities challenged the order before the Division Bench, the High Court noted,
"The arguments of the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellants is to the effect that the student should be imposed capital punishment for the mistake. We are unable to agree with the highly technical contention of the learned Additional Advocate General."
The Court also referred to the Rule stating "If opted for and upgraded in Rule 3, the candidate has to relinquish the seat from Round 1 or Round 2 and join the Round 3 allotted seat. He / She will not have any rights over the Round – 1 or Round – 2 seats."
Referring to the Rule, the HC bench observed,
"The language used is very clear and it applies only to upgradation and not to degradation. What has happened to this unfortunate candidate is, having been allotted a MBBS seat in the first round, he has been pushed to BDS, which is undoubtedly a degradation. Hence, we do not think this Rule can be invoked by the authorities to deny a seat to the said student."
The Division Bench further noted that the Single Judge had referred to a Division Bench order of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Lakshmi P.Gowda Vs. Nation National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences, where the Court held that "the claim that re-allotment would open flood gates cannot be a defence to deny a meritorious candidate of a seat. In fact, the appointments to the posts of Civil Judges, Junior Division was forced to be reopened twice because of the bungling done by the TNPSC and we are not new to re-opening and re-allotment."
Accordingly, the Division Bench upheld the Single Judge's order and dismissed the appeal filed by the Directorate of Medical Education and Research.
To view the order, click on the link below:
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.